An alternative for cane farmers proved problematic for two
 reasons. First, they had little experience with other crops after
 generations of monocultural sugar production, and many had
 neither the capital to convert to new crops nor reliable markets for
 such crops. Second, demand for land for residential uses was so
 great that much of their land would have been sold for urban uses
 if the farmers did not have an alternative replacement of their in-
 come loss from the extinct cane industry. Even though it was
 recommended that "sugar be replaced by other agricultural enter-
 prises," and that ". .. every possible step be taken to retain, and
 reconstruct, the agriculture of St. Croix, provided only that the
 reconstructed agricultural industry must prove itself profitable"
 (Blaut et al., 1965), the abandonment of sugar led to a rapid and
 irreversible change from a predominantly rural, agricultural land-
 scape to an urbanized or suburbanized one. That the number of
 farms decreased from 501 in 1960 to 466 in 1970 (Table 1), and
 produced the largest percent change of 54.5% in the study
 period, and farm acreage dropped from 35,539 to 20,470 acres, a
 change of 48.2%, are clear indicators that the stage may have
 been set for an irrevocable decline.
 The unprecedented growth of tourism in the 1960s served to
impact on agriculture in at least three ways. It created a huge de-
mand for labor, it induced considerable growth in population,
and it exerted pressure on the land resource. As the number of
tourist facilities increased to accommodate the rising tide of
tourists, economic opportunities multiplied and attracted the
seasonally employed sugar workers and the unemployed. Given
the social stigma that clings tenaciously to farm work throughout
the region, many a farm laborer willingly traded his overalls for a
bellboy's garb. Not only was income from sugar associated with
low-wage employment tourism was considered prosperous. This
led one government official to observe that "income from tourism
over the past five years has more than tripled the combined
returns from rum and raw sugar production" (Economic Policy
Council, 1979).
 The construction industry, spurred by the rising need to
accommodate tourists, contributed to the decline of agriculture
in two ways. In the first place, it too created its own demand for
labor, which served to entice labor from farming. Secondly, the
demand was met primarily by immigrant labor. The great influx
of these workers increased the need for housing so acutely that
there was little alternative but to encroach on agricultural land.
This was the case in St. Thomas where public housing complexes
and an 18-hole golf course and condominium complex speeded
the transition from rural to urban uses. In St. Croix, two golf
courses had the same effect. Thus the suburbanization that Blaut
et al. (1965) advised against became a reality. In lamenting the
epitome of this process, one report noted that since the early
1960's, agricultural land on St. Thomas had dwindled to a mere
1,448 acres. It continued: "The encroachment of residential ...
development has brought this about and is worsening the situa-
tion The potentials for any large-scale development on St.
Thomas are very low" (Virgin Islands Planning Office, 1977).
 In view of the limited land resource in the Virgin Islands, it is
fair to say that any plan for agriculture would recognize that one is
dealing with an irreplaceable natural resource that is not only scarce
but expensive. And that once agrarian land is committed to an
alternative use, it is extremely improbable that it will ever be
reconverted to productive agrarian use. This is perhaps most likely
to be so for land that is used for commercial or industrial uses.
 While the major inroads into agrarian land use came from
tourist facilities and commercial establishments on St. Thomas
and St. John, two major industrial complexes characterized the
diminution in St. Croix. Despite the fact that some 18,689 acres

are in agricultural use there (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1982),
and it still has potential for expansion of farming activities, grave
concerns are being expressed about future development. Trends


indicate that "St. Croix is showing signs of a pre-industrialization
mood, and that agricultural development may fall off through
the leasing or sale of large tracts to industrial companies ((Virgin
Islands Planning Office, 1977). In St. Thomas, both commercial
and business usage exceed the zoned acreage, and in St. Croix,
the increasing industrial base-with a possible additional oil
refinery -will necessitate a substantial increase in consumption of
the once highly productive agricultural land. Consensus for this
view is summarized in this statement: "It is government policy
which eventually determines where emphasis should be placed.
In the Virgin Islands today business and commercial
developments are top-ranking with industrial [sic] or even above.
Agriculture, on the other hand, is ranked lowest in priority"
(Virgin Islands Planning Office, 1977).
 An additional set of factors which help to explain the decline of
 agriculture is what McElroy refers to as the "complex of both
 internal and external forces" (1979). His delineation includes the
 traditional high volume export-import orientation embedded in
 the local economy, together with a combination of relative afflu-
 ence, urbanization and supermarket tastes. The territorial status
 of the Virgin Islands and its geographic proximity provide
 relatively easy access to, and penetration by, a volume of
 comparatively low-cost suppliers of a variety of foodstuffs, includ-
 ing staple items like eggs, chicken, milk, pork, beef and their
 derivatives, as well as vegetables (fresh, refrigerated and tinned).
 Despite the fact that there is no commercial production of
 vegetables in the islands and 99% of the food consumed is im-
 ported (Department of Agriculture, 1980), a visiting trade mission
 found cause to express concern over the lack of consistent
 marketing practices ranging from quality control through regular
 delivery and distribution routines (Economic Policy Council, 1979).
 Even though an official agricultural policy document does not
 exist, there is little question that the impact of government action
 on agriculture in the territory has been considerable. It is also evi-
 dent, however, that there is no consistency in policy, for while
 one branch may proclaim the positive steps by the administration
 to promote agrarian development, another may at the same time
 deplore its apparent regressive actions.
 In reference to the economic policy which contributed to the
alienation of prime agrarian tracts after 1966, to heavy industry
and ". .. which indirectly spawned widespread suburban sprawl
by sponsoring labor-intensive tourism, federal highway construc-
tion and laissez-faire finance and realty practices .. .", McElroy
(1979) called this an "anti-agricultural policy" that was responsi-
ble for the ".. annual declines recorded in the number of farms
in operation and in the amount of acreage under cultivation."
While the Department of Agriculture (1980) stated that "the
basic mission of agriculture is self-sufficiency in food
production," the Economic Policy Council (1979) believed that
"there is no chance of the Virgin Islands ever becoming self-
sufficient in food." This latter is given credence by the Planning
Office's belief that agriculture is lowest among government's
priorities.
 Varying views of agriculture have been expressed as a "vogue-
like preoccupation with self-sufficiency" (McElroy, 1979) and as a
sector ". of our economy which manages to receive loving
remarks, supportive statements and other types of accolades, but
little of the money, and less and less active interest on the part of
the general populace. Everyone wants the output of the farms,
but little of the work involved" (Economic Policy Council, 1979).
The Department of Agriculture (1980) records that efforts to
revitalize agriculture have intensified because of an increasing
dependence on imported food, concerns over energy conservation
and competing land use, the emergence of several back-to-the-
land subcultures, and a realization that agriculture is an integral
component of the territory's economic development. Yet there is
an apparent contradiction in the kind of public evidence which


PROCEEDINGS of the CARIBBEAN FOOD CROPS SOCIETY-VOL. XX


28